But Puck, that interview was 7 years ago. According to my coworker it has no bearing on NObama's views now. Surely NObama in his work in the State and Federal Senates he has grown to respect the Constitution and its intent.

In West Hollywood a hanging effigy of Sarah Palin hangs on the side of a home- Now, where are all the women that should take exception to this show of woman hatred-there was an interview with the two men that put it up as 'installation art".

How does someone do that?? That would be like hanging a dummy of a black person from a noose in a tree.

How does someone do that?? That would be like hanging a dummy of a black person from a noose in a tree.

I may not be pro-Palin, but geez... that's going a little too far.

They spoke to the gents who seemed a little "effete"-they probably were upset about SP having more money to dress up and nicer than they do.
I think it was the FBI or SS that were parked outside the residence and I guess they were in for a visit and intelligence BBQing (grilling) from them.

----------

Now,

There was a cardboard BO that was hung from a tree outside a school. Someone hung him with fishing string from a tree branch and put a sign on it that said something about rejects.

Now, It you want to look at the 'racist' side of the story, you can conjure up
white sheets, burning crosses and lynching.....

Or you can see the hanging of the cutout with a piece of fishing string, something not as obvious and probably not as offensive . What if they had hung it by the ears? Or punched a hole thru his head?

The AHs that see evil behind every bush and under every rock are the same people that won't hesitate to blow something out of proportion for their cause-or to improve a "victim status".
I laugh when I see Al Sharptongue and the rev Jerkson jump thru hoops to prove that world is full of hate - instead of trying to bring people together they only jump the gap to prove there is a chasm between everyone.

It's all in bad taste. The Palin hangers have the same right to 'clown' on her, but it's only a crime when your skin, religion or race is involved.

Being obvious with a noose is one thing, fishing string is stretching it.

--------------

I also saw a sports report on a white sports writer that did a story about a coach who was on a black athlete's case. He wrote something like 'Coach X is tightening the noose on Player Y"

That turns out to be a "racist" commentary because a black player was involved.

These numbers ought to raise serious concern because of Mr. Obama's extreme left-wing views about the role of judges. He believes -- and he is quite open about this -- that judges ought to decide cases in light of the empathy they ought to feel for the little guy in any lawsuit.

Who needs LAWS? Let your heart be your guide.

This raises the question of whether Mr. Obama can in good faith take the presidential oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" as he must do if he is to take office. Does Mr. Obama support the Constitution as it is written, or does he support amendments to guarantee welfare? Is his provision of a "tax cut" to millions of Americans who currently pay no taxes merely a foreshadowing of constitutional rights to welfare, health care, Social Security, vacation time and the redistribution of wealth? Perhaps the candidate ought to be asked to answer these questions before the election rather than after.

How does someone do that?? That would be like hanging a dummy of a black person from a noose in a tree.

I may not be pro-Palin, but geez... that's going a little too far.

They were talking about this on Headline News today. Apparently because it was of a woman and near Halloween, the FBI doesn't think it's a hate crime!!!! I bet their mommas are proud!!!

No matter what anyone does, someone some where will be offended some how!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MY BLESSINGS:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grandma (RB), Chester, Angel, Chip
Leonardo (RB), Luke (RB), Winnie, Chuck,
Frankie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WHERE YOU ARE IS WHERE YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Right Liz... I am the one who misunderstood. You are so infinetley more clairvoyant than I, than anybody for that matter. It's not like I have spent most of my adult life spending time reading, discussing (honsetly... not with intellectual juveniles...) and studying our founders and what their intent was for our country.

Liz, there is not one intellectually honest bone in your body. You would not see the truth if it slapped you in the face with a brick. See, I admit it when I am beaten.... I am honest enough and wise enough to know that we learn more from failure than success...

So tell me... What WAS his point? The more detail you can provide, the better, please.

ABC News' Imtiyaz Delawala Reports: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin went beyond her running mate's recent attack on Sen. Barack Obama -- inaccurately claiming that Obama called the lack of "redistributive change" during the civil rights movement a "tragedy" -- and used Obama's 2001 interview to insinuate that he wants to re-write the U.S. Constitution and appoint radical Supreme Court justices and judges who would confiscate the property of American citizens.

At two rallies in Western Pennsylvania last night, Palin referenced at the top of her remarks a 2001 public radio interview with Obama that surfaced this week, in which Obama discussed the role of the courts in the civil rights movement.

"There he was talking about the need for quote 'redistributive change,'" Palin said on the campus of Shippensburg University Tuesday night. “Sen. Obama said that he regretted that the Supreme Court hadn't been more radical. And he described the Court's refusal to take up the issues of redistribution of wealth as a tragedy. And he said he also regretted that the Supreme Court didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers there in the Constitution”

Obama had in fact argued the opposite in the 2001 interview, saying that the civil rights movement had become too focused on making change through the judicial system, rather than from the ground up through community organizations.

But Palin used Obama's words to follow an argument Sen. John McCain has made this week that Obama has long-advocated for "spreading the wealth." "Obama says that he wants to spread the wealth," Palin said to boos from the crowd. "In other words he thinks that it's your job to earn the wealth and it's his job to spread it."

But Palin then went beyond any argument McCain has made, using the 2001 interview to insinuate that Obama wants to re-write the U.S. Constitution and appoint radical Supreme Court justices, while also suggesting that under Obama, judges would confiscate the property of American citizens.

Referencing the interview, Palin said, "So you have to ask, is this a suggestion that's he’d want to re-write the founding document of our great nation to accomplish his goals. And what does that say about his ideas on future Supreme Court justices?"

"Let me remind Barack Obama of something else. When judges don’t confiscate your property and your hard-earned -- all of your hard-earned money and then re-distribute that, he may call that a tragedy. But I call it fairness and adherence to our U.S. Constitution," Palin added later in her remarks.

In the interview, Obama described one of the "tragedies of the civil rights movement" was that "the civil rights movement became so court-focused".

"I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways, we still suffer from that," Obama said in the interview.

When a caller asked whether economic redistribution should come through the courts or the legislative process, Obama replied, "I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn't structured that way."

Obama's 2001 interview made no mention of judges confiscating property. The Palin campaign did not provide clarification on what Palin was referring to with the remark.

Palin said the 2001 interview revealed Obama's "real ideology" and that his goal to "spread your wealth around" would only spread "scarcity and poverty and bureaucracy" and would stifle the country's entrepreneurial spirit. She asked those in the crowd to support the Republican ticket to preserve the "uniquely American system that our founding fathers created."

"Sometimes in politics it's those candid little moments that give us the whole picture," Palin said at a second rally on the Penn State campus in State College, PA last night. "But our opponent's ideological commitment to spread your wealth around has been tried in other societies, and the only thing it ever spreads is scarcity and poverty and bureaucracy, and it stifles the entrepreneurial spirit that made this country the greatest country on Earth."

The comments were similar to remarks Palin made at rallies this weekend in Iowa, where the Republican vice presidential nominee seemed to move from accusing Obama’s economic plans of having elements of socialism to also allude to the problems faced by communist systems.

I've Been Boo'd

I've been Frosted

Today is the oldest you've ever been, and the youngest you'll ever be again.

The thing I find most hysterical is that there are comments, tapes, videos and other media that's been 'taken outta context, 'massaged, misconstrued and misquoted' that BO has made. He will not and cannot defend himself or take the time set the record straight about any of his gaffes.

Every GOP challenge is an attack on BO's character, patriotism and race-BO has his minions constantly defending him-and never really answering any of the questions from the media.

What does he mean?

He could easily end all speculation about his radio comments and the supposed dinner party he had with Mr. PLO spokesperson captured on tape and owned by the El Lay Times.....

What about medical and school records he has not released?

BO isn't anyone that wants or thinks he should be forthright with anyone asking questions about who he is and what his agenda might be.

That's one of the basic reasons that I really do not care for him or his politics.
He's got 'typical politician" written all over.

The BO mystique is nothing more that a curtain put up by him and his handlers.

IT amounts to the old line about "ignoring the man behind the curtain".

It's just a man pulling levers, making noise and spewing flames to distract his followers and keep them from realizing that he's just another idiot, running for office and making promises he cannot keep.

Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.

The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of “hope” and “change” are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.

One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, “so there’s not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair”.

The aide said that Mr Obama himself was the first to realise that expectations risked being inflated.

In an interview with a Colorado radio station, Mr Obama appeared to be engaged already in expectation lowering. Asked about his goals for the first hundred days, he said he would need more time to tackle such big and costly issues as health care reform, global warming and Iraq. “The first hundred days is going to be important, but it’s probably going to be the first thousand days that makes the difference,” he said. He has also been reminding crowds in recent days how “hard” it will be to achieve his goals, and that it will take time.

“I won’t stand here and pretend that any of this will be easy – especially now,” Mr Obama told a rally in Sarasota, Florida, yesterday, citing “the cost of this economic crisis, and the cost of the war in Iraq”. Mr Obama’s transition team is headed by John Podesta, a Washington veteran and a former chief-of-staff to Bill Clinton. He has spent months overseeing a virtual Democratic government-in-exile to plan a smooth transition should Mr Obama emerge victorious next week. The plans are so far advanced that an Obama Cabinet has been largely decided upon, with the expectation that most of his senior appointments could be announced shortly after election day.

Yet Mr Obama and his aides are under no illusions about the size of the challenges the Democrat will inherit if he enters the Oval Office. Tom Daschle, the party’s former leader in the US Senate and a strong contender for the post of White House chief-of-staff in an Obama administration, said last month that the winner next week would have only a 50 per cent chance of winning a second term in 2012.

Not only will the next president take office with the country sliding into a potentially long recession — and mired in debt — but the challenges abroad are immense. There is an unfinished war in Iraq, a worsening situation in Afghanistan and an unstable and nuclear-armed Pakistan to contend with. Iran appears intent on acquiring the bomb and there remains the ever-present threat from al-Qaeda and Islamic extremists.

If he wins, Mr Obama will inherit a Democratic-controlled Congress, and might even have the benefit of a 60-seat filibuster-proof “supermajority” in the Senate. Such a scenario would allow him to push through legislation largely unfettered by Republican opposition. Yet it also means that should the country still be mired in recession in three years’ time, voters — who have short memories — will probably blame him and the Democrats on Capitol Hill. Those stakes have led Mr Obama to conclude that while expectations need to be tempered, big things need to be achieved very early in his first term, when he will still have the political capital to achieve some of his most ambitious legislative goals.

Having promised “real” change, the pressure will be on him to deliver. In the Colorado interview, Mr Obama added: “The next president has got to come quickly out of the box.”

The early priorities being lined up if he takes power are a mixture of symbolism and substance. He plans to make a major address in a big Muslim country early in his first term. Having pledged on the campaign trail to close Guantanamo Bay, he is also determined to make early moves to rid America of the controversial prison. Yet what to do with the remaining inmates looms as an intractable problem, as many of their home governments refuse to allow them to return.

Mr Obama’s first legislative goals will be to follow through on his pledge to cut taxes for the middle class and raise them for the wealthiest Americans, and to push through a hugely expensive Bill to provide near-universal health insurance.

"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence. You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves."